Free Market PM | ||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||||||||||||
 |
[ Login/Subscribe ] | |||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
||||
 |
||||||||||||
Features
Departments
Executive
Resources
|
Home > Departments > Opinion
Economics and project work share much in common. Unfortunately, project management theory seems to be lagging behind modern economists', favoring quantitative methods and deterministic planning over agility, entrepreneurship and individual responsibility. The dismal consequences are widespread, but it doesn't have to be this way. There is a choice.
Economics and project work share one common element. Each deals with managing complex systemic interactions. Both the economist and the project manager understand that no model could ever emulate the whole. Each focuses attention on indicators that, often as not, tell where the system has been more than predict where the system will turn next. Both fields are learning that acknowledging the playing field might be more important to success than rigidly enforcing particular rules of play.
Both the economist and the project manager understand that whatever the theory embodied in their models, the systems they oversee operate based upon decisions made by less than fully informed agents. An individual makes the decision to buy or sell, hoard or share, based upon local information and personal ethics, not global understanding. The wise economist, like the wise project manager, understands that their decisions, too, are much less than fully informed. And must necessarily be.
The sad history of planned economies should tell us all we need to know about the efficacy of managing according to plan.
Please login/register to read the entire article.
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Privacy Policy Contact Us User Agreement